Yep ,that's the best you can manage EP , a near fifty yr old comedy sketch . A total failure to respond to multiple examples showing that you got it wrong ,and the hilarious ."by the way, the Thom's hypothesis about the henges is now established doctrine".

The joke is that Wittry was getting his terminology and astronomy wrong in roughly the same period ,as the sketch .The problem is ,is that you are stuck in that period never having learnt the lessons from these errors .

tiompan, you need to face up to the fact that you are going to have to share a taste of the Stonehenge money with the Cahokia hengeIf the site of the Yuchi henge is located, you'll have to share it with them as well.And I may as well inform you that EMR surveys have shown some unusual post hole patterns here in Ohio.If they turn out to be henges, you'll have to share that Stonehenge glory and money with them as well.

As archaeology is an evolving science,it should come as no surprise to you that its language is evolving as well.

As I type these little notes largely with my right hand,please be to the point and concise.

Usually people believe what they want to believe until reality intrudes.

E.P. You have been provided with concise details proving that your definition(s) and understanding of the term Henge is wrong .Your misunderstanding is based on the errors of others from fifty years ago . Unusual post hole patterns do not a henge make . You have had multiple examples of contemporary definitions of the term ,they have not changed much since Kendrick in the 1930's and at no time have ever been anything like what you have suggested . Wittry was mistaken in his use of the term ,and in his understanding of the putative alignments at the original Woodhenge , as well as the actual nature of the monument , never mind the rubbish about "alignments "at the US site .

There is no Yuchi henge ,as with much of what you come up with , it's a fantasy , you made it up . As well as being unable to respond meaningfully to the highlighting of your errors you have also failed to provide the most basic details about the Yuchi monuments , despite being asked .

Tiompan wrote:E.P., You have been provided with concise details proving that your definition(s) and understanding of the term Henge is wrong .Your misunderstanding is based on the errors of others from fifty years ago . Unusual post hole patterns do not a henge make . You have had multiple examples of contemporary definitions of the term,they have not changed much since Kendrick in the 1930's and at no time have ever been anything like what you have suggested .

Wittry was mistaken in his use of the term, and in his understanding of the putative alignments at the original Woodhenge, as well as the actual nature of the monument ,never mind the rubbish about "alignments "at the US site .

There is no Yuchi henge, as with much of what you come up with , it's a fantasy , you made it up . As well as being unable to respond meaningfully to the highlighting of your errors you have also failed to provide the most basic details about the Yuchi monuments , despite being asked .

That was 50 years ago, tiompan. As at least theoretically archaeology is an evolving science, perhaps you may want to consider gracefully accepting change in the terms used in it,and aging gracefully,as an alternative to becoming an old curmudgeon.

As for myself,I keep forgetting that other people are not aware of information that I am aware of.Yuchi henge lore was covered in my book in 2006, which is always available to read for free via inter-library loan,if you do not care to spend money on a personal copy, either used or new. It is fully foot noted, (at least it is a fully footnoted as I could do before my stroke interfered;the lack of fulll footnotes pointing to the lesser known contact era Mayan literature annoys me,but I was unable to get back to the University of Virginia library at the time)and thus it will provide you or anyone else a base for future research.

Work has been done since then on trying to identify their locations, but much of it has not been too good, in my opinion.If you want to tackle the problem of going through the contact era records of the Yuchi henges and their use and locations, feel free to do so.

Myself and my colleague Fletcher Wilson are currently working on "Adena" Monoliths.If as Fletcher currently strongly suspects, they also had an astronomical function,then we will likely start to refer to them as "henges".

It is 2017, after all, and not the 1930's.

Though probably we can both do the Charleston or Jitter bug,there are younger generations coming along...

Usually people believe what they want to believe until reality intrudes.

E.P. The error in relation to the the terminology , was from 50 years ago , we have moved on ,but you haven't , you are still thinking in terms of Wittry and Thom .The terminology hasn't changed ,there are young American archaeologists who understand the correct definition .You keep mentioning the Yuchi Henge but are incapable of providing any data about it other than your own fantasy ,despite being asked to come up with one serious reference .

Monoliths described as henges , lol . If your previous comments are anything to go by the Adena monoliths are yet another fantasy along with their putative astro connections .

Since I "assembled" a book, which you can read for free.from my point of view it is rude of you to expect me to re-write it herein a personal note to you. If you are interested in Yuchi henges,the material that was available at that time is in it.

Usually people believe what they want to believe until reality intrudes.

E.P.Yet another evasion . Lets face it you can't come up with the goods can you ? It is telling that you were not so shy about mentioning the putative Yuchi monuments in earlier posts but have been incapable of providing any reliable info about their siting , condition , typology etc since being asked . All you have said has only highlighted your ignorance of the term Henge , confusion about what constitutes a monument and confirmed that the "monuments are unmentioned in any reliable source , and are simply yet another of your fantasies .